Mind's Eye Re: Different points of view are all true

What appears from time to time is also a definition therefore the
truth is mutable.

On Aug 22, 7:58 am, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Haha yes indeed they do, but as Andrew tells us, this is due to ones
> perspective.  A square is a square and a cube is a cube.  They may appear
> differantlyfrom time to time and place to place, but the truth is still a
> square is made up of 4 equal lines, and evermore shall this truth be.
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 22 August 2012 13:47:21 UTC+1, rigsy03 wrote:
> > Both square and cube disappear into a dot via the vanishing point.
>
> > On Aug 22, 7:24 am, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Heh yeah Rigsy, some would insist that a cube is a square, they would be
> > > wrong to do so, but i guess some would still try huh.
>
> > > All truths matter both absolute and relaitive.
>
> > > Some absolute truths are what we try to teach in schools, how would you
> > > feel if your wage packet was light?  I worked X hours at Y rate,
> > therefore
> > > I should be paid Z.  Yes indeed I do not think many workers would be
> > > willing to suggest this truth be subjective.
>
> > > Most subjective truths only matter umm subjectivly.  Are, as I suspect,
> > > Leeds Utd the greatest footbal team in the world?
>
> > > Subjective truth, as it's name suggest has no ultimate authority and
> > largly
> > > I would agree with Andrew and say that such truths are about as valid as
> > > each other(until they become objective). Objective truths owe there
> > > objectivity to evidance that anyone can see and make up their own minds
> > on,
> > > so I would say that empirical facts are the ultmate authority.
>
> > > Yes indeed, I think that most of what we call truth can be called
> > > subjective, but there are some objective truths out there.
>
> > > On Wednesday, 22 August 2012 13:03:24 UTC+1, rigsy03 wrote:
> > > > Some will insist a cube is a square or twiddle with perspective.
>
> > > > When does absolute truth matter? Is truth forever subject to
> > > > correction? Who is the final authority of truth?
>
> > > > Eye witnesses are a weak defense. Justice makes mistakes.
>
> > > > People change their minds and feelings over time. (Think of divorce as
> > > > an example. I love you can become I hate you, etc.) Then truth becomes
> > > > a matter of taste or fancy rather than an objective reality.
>
> > > > Scientific truths are constantly subjected to corrections.
>
> > > > Outside of a short list, everything is up for grabs.
>
> > > > On Aug 22, 5:05 am, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Yes yes I get this, I don't agree but I get it.
>
> > > > > Some truth is subjective, and some is objective.  Whether you see
> > the
> > > > > elephant as just the leg, the tusk the ear or the trunk is
> > irrelevant to
> > > > > what the objective truth of the elephant is.  So your position
> > colours
> > > > your
> > > > > POV, this does not automaticaly make your POV valid.  It means only
> > that
> > > > > you have not yet seen the thing from all angles.
>
> > > > > There is a problem with makeing statments of generalisations, they
> > are
> > > > > inveriably wrong, as things really do not follow general principles.
> >  To
> > > > > say for example 'I claim that all truths are subjective ONLY' is a
> > > > massive
> > > > > mistake.  It takes only one tiny bit of evidance, logic or counter
> > > > argument
> > > > > to show just one little objective truth, for that statement to be
> > false.
> > > > > **
> > > > > I belive I have already shown that there exist objective truths,
> > i.e. a
> > > > > square is made up of 4 equal lines.  Now feel free to counter that,
> > good
> > > > > luck.
>
> > > > > On Wednesday, 22 August 2012 10:31:37 UTC+1, andrew vecsey wrote:
> > > > > > I claim that all truths are subjective only. After all we only
> > have
> > > > our
> > > > > > own eyes and our own minds to obtain our own POVs and to claim
> > what is
> > > > true
> > > > > > and what is not. If your POV is from earth, then the sun goes
> > around
> > > > the
> > > > > > earth rising in the east and setting in the west. If you look on
> > > > earth`s
> > > > > > motion from another POV, then the earth rotates around the sun.
> > From
> > > > the
> > > > > > universe`s POV, then it moves still in a different way. All are
> > true,
> > > > > > depending on the POV.
>
> > > > > > On Wednesday, August 22, 2012 10:44:44 AM UTC+2, Lee Douglas
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > >> But that make no sense at all.  Like the blind men and the
> > elephant,
> > > > > >> better to say that differnt seemingly contradictory POV's  may
> > appear
> > > > to be
> > > > > >> true.  However this is due to not having all of the data
> > avaliable
> > > > from
> > > > > >> which to make your mind up.  If it is objective truth you are
> > talking
> > > > about
> > > > > >> then a square cannot at the same time be discribed as a circle
> > and
> > > > yet
> > > > > >> remain true.  If it is subjective truth then this is due to one
> > > > subjectivie
> > > > > >> position.
>
> > > > > >> On Tuesday, 21 August 2012 18:04:56 UTC+1, andrew vecsey wrote:
>
> > > > > >>> The different paths of earth thru space is like the blind men
> > > > describing
> > > > > >>> the elephant.
> > > > > >>> The density of the vacuum is like negatives of photographs.
> > > > > >>> We are talking about examples of different points of views of
> > one
> > > > thing
> > > > > >>> that give contradictory descriptions, and each description
> > claiming
> > > > to be
> > > > > >>> the true description.
>
> > > > > >>> On Tuesday, August 21, 2012 5:49:38 PM UTC+2, Lee Douglas wrote:
>
> > > > > >>>> Or differant points of view can all claim to be true even
> > though
> > > > > >>>> enivitably only one is?
>
> > > > > >>>> It's sorta like the 5 blind men and the one elephant isn't it?
>
> > > > > >>>> Meh!  Bedsies just what kind of truths are we talking now?
>
> > > > > >>>> On Tuesday, 21 August 2012 16:30:01 UTC+1, andrew vecsey wrote:
>
> > > > > >>>>> Different points of views can be all true. Comments and
> > discussion
> > > > > >>>>> greatly appreciated
>
> > > > > >>>>> For example,
>
> > > > > >>>>>    - The earth does NOT rotate around sun.
> > > > > >>>>>    - The emptiness of a vacuum is more dense than the most
> > dense
> > > > > >>>>>    matter.
> > > > > >>>>>    - atoms and their electrons have physical shapes that
> > determine
> > > > > >>>>>    their characteristics.
>
> > > > > >>>>> In the essay below, it is argued that different points of view
> > can
> > > > all
> > > > > >>>>> be true.
>
> > > > > >>>>>  *Universe** centric point of view*
> > > > > >>>>> From an earth centric point of view, the sun and universe
> > rotate
> > > > > >>>>> around the earth.
> > > > > >>>>> From a sun centric point of view, the earth rotates around the
> > > > sun.
> > > > > >>>>> From a universe centric point of view, the earth does not
> > rotate
> > > > > >>>>> around the sun but travels along with it in a sinusoidal
> > swinging
> > > > from side
> > > > > >>>>> to side but always going in a forward path. It never actually
> > > > turns around
> > > > > >>>>> 360 degrees and goes the other way, like it does in the sun
> > > > centric view.This repetitive swinging from one side of the sun to the
> > other
> > > > side appears
> > > > > >>>>> from the sun's point of view to be an orbital, but from a
> > > > universal point
> > > > > >>>>> of view, it is sinusoidal. The earth is always being pushed
> > > > towards the
> > > > > >>>>> sun. When it is on the front side of it, the push towards the
> > sun
> > > > acts to
> > > > > >>>>> decelerate it. When it is at the sun's back side, the push
> > towards
> > > > the sun
> > > > > >>>>> accelerates it forward. When it is on one side of the sun, the
> > > > push towards
> > > > > >>>>> the sun pushes it towards the other side. The earth follows
> > the
> > > > sun like a
> > > > > >>>>> child running circles around his father as they are both
> > walking.
> > > > The earth
> > > > > >>>>> spins at 463 m/s at its equator making it look from our
> > stationary
> > > > earth
> > > > > >>>>> that the sun and the universe rotate around the earth.  The
> > sun
> > > > and
> > > > > >>>>> the earth travel 250 km/s thru the galaxy. The earth travels
> > at 30
> > > > km/s
> > > > > >>>>> around the sun. That makes the earth's path thru space non
> > > > orbital.
>
> > > > > >>>>> ***An inside-out point of view*
>
> > > > > >>>>> Everyday experience indicates that mass is denser than the
> > space
> > > > it
> > > > > >>>>> moves in. We are accustomed and taught to think that the
> > fabric of
> > > > our
> > > > > >>>>> space is a vacuum of nothing and the particles of mass in it
> > are
> > > > made from
> > > > > >>>>> matter. We are used to seeing matter as black solid balls
> > moving
> > > > in a white
> > > > > >>>>> empty space. This is analogous to solids and liquids in an
> > > > environment of
> > > > > >>>>> air. The observed behavior of light, gravity and inertia of
> > mass
> > > > requires
> > > > > >>>>> that the surrounding fabric of space be much denser than the
> > > > masses that
> > > > > >>>>> move around in it. It requires that mass be much less dense
> > than
> > > > space.
> > > > > >>>>> With an inside-out point of view, mass in space are like
> > bubbles
> > > > in a
> > > > > >>>>> liquid. It is like looking at the negatives of photographs.
>
> > > > > >>>>> *A** Mechanistic point of view**
> > > > > >>>>> *
> > > > > >>>>> By proposing shapes and motion to atoms that reflect forms and
> > > > > >>>>> movements observed in our everyday reality, an understanding
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > >>>>> fundamental unobserved particles of our universe is attained.
> > A
> > > > mechanism
> > > > > >>>>> is proposed for the forces of gravity, inertia and the EM
> > fields
> > > > as well as
> > > > > >>>>> for electricity, magnetism and radiation, all reflecting
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--